Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (654371)	5/10/2012 11:45:51 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579109

Climbing Income Ladder Easier in New Jersey Than Texas, Pew Says By Esmé E. Deprez - May 9, 2012 8:00 PM PT A week after the Occupy Wall Streetmovement protested economic inequality in May Day rallies across the U.S., a study found that the ability to become rich may depend on where you live. Residents of three East Coast states -- Maryland, New Jersey and New York -- were the most likely to move up the earnings ladder from the bottom and the least likely to fall from the top, according to a study released today by Pew Charitable Trusts, a nonpartisan research organization based in Washington. Louisiana, Oklahoma and South Carolina had the worst prospects for so-called economic mobility. “This shows that the American dream and equality of opportunity differ from state to state,” Diana Elliot, research manager at Pew’s Economic Mobility Project, said in an interview. “This is yet another indicator that leaders and policy makers have at their disposal to understand how their state measures up.” The report, the first gauge of economic mobility at the state level, adds context to the debate over America’s image as a land of opportunity amid growing income inequality. It follows past Pew studies showing that Americans trail their Canadian and European counterparts in their ability to improve their financial standing. Census Data Pew used confidential data from the Census Bureau and Social Security Administration on the inflation-adjusted earnings of more than 60,000 people born between 1943 and 1958. The analysis then compared participants’ average earnings over a five-year period in their 30s to those in their 40s. The report measured how states’ residents stacked up against the national average on so-called absolute mobility, which compares earnings growth over time, and relative mobility, which examines whether people’s position along the income spectrum rose or fell compared with their peers. Maryland, New Jersey and New York scored above-average on all three measures, followed by Connecticut, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Utah, which did so on two. Louisiana, Oklahoma and South Carolina scored the worst on all three gauges, followed by Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina and Texas. Determining why states or regions performed the way they did was beyond the study’s scope, said Elliot, who worked on the report with Erin Currier, who oversees the Economic Mobility Project. Important drivers of economic mobility at the national level include educational attainment, savings and assets, and neighborhood poverty during childhood, she said. On an individual level, people who moved from the state in which they were born had better-than-average financial mobility, the study found. More than two-thirds of Americans remain in their birth states throughout their lives, Elliott said. The most recent data the study used was from 2007, so it’s unclear what impact the recession that began in December of that year may have had since, Elliot said. bloomberg.com

To: i-node who wrote (654371)	5/10/2012 6:34:59 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1579109

The U.S. Military Takes On Global Warming By Climate Guest Blogger on May 10, 2012 at 3:37 pm Image: Pamela Davis Photography by Dominique Browning, via Moms Clean Air Force As more polls show that a majority of Americans want action on carbon pollution and global warming, leadership on fighting climate change is coming from surprising places—starting with the military. At a recent reception held by Environmental Defense Fund in Washington D.C…. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave a speech in which he connected the dots between climate change, energy and security issues. He became the highest-ranking official in the Obama administration to do so. Panetta explained that his Department of Defense is facing a budget shortfall of more than $3 billion because of unexpected fuel costs. “I have a deep interest in more sustainable and efficient energy options,” he said. Secretary Panetta went on to describe how the U. S. military will be called on for humanitarian assistance in the face of rising seas, longer droughts, and more frequent and the severe natural disasters that are a result of global warming. Secretary Panetta was followed on the podium by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, who has served since May 2009. In 1987, the Harvard-trained lawyer became the youngest governor in the nation when he won office in Mississippi. Mabus declared, in an inimitably rich Southern drawl: “We buy too much fossil fuel from the most volatile places on earth.” He emphasized that “drilling alone will never solve our national security concerns over foreign oil.” Mabus went on to announce that the Navy has made a commitment to get 50% of its energy from renewable sources, like biofuels, solar and wind, by 2025. That’s the most ambitious goal for renewable energy in the country—higher even than California’s! Mabus pointed out that the Navy has always led in pioneering new sources of fuel, whether it was from moving from sail to coal in the 1850s, to oil in the 20th century, and nuclear energy in the 1950s. “Every time, there were doubters and naysayers,” he said forcefully.“Every time. And every single time, they were wrong and they will be wrong again this time.” Mabus vigorously countered the argument that renewable energy is more expensive. “Well of course it is! Every new technology is more expensive. What if we hadn’t started using computers because they were more expensive than typewriters? What if we hadn’t started using cell phones because they were more expensive than land lines? Where would we be?” Both Panetta and Mabus are on the front lines again—in a battle that will help us curb carbon emissions and lead us to energy independence. Anyone want to join the notoriously craven science deniers at the Heartland Institute in their claim that any leader who fights global warming is no better than tyrants and killers like Charles Manson, Osama bin Laden and Unabomber Kacyznski? Go ahead. Make Secretary Mabus’ day. thinkprogress.org